what is reasonable doubt?

Question

keep the answer short please.

Answer 1

Presumption of Innocence

Burden of Proof
(in cases without an affirmative defense)

Proof Beyond A Reasonable Doubt

We now turn to the fundamental principles of our law that apply in all criminal trials–the presumption of innocence, the burden of proof, and the requirement of proof beyond a reasonable doubt.i

Throughout these proceedings, the defendant is presumed to be innocent.ii As a result, you must find the defendant not guilty, unless, on the evidence presented at this trial, you conclude that the People have proven the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.iii

[NOTE: Add, if the defendant introduced evidence:
In determining whether the People have satisfied their burden of proving the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, you may consider all the evidence presented, whether by the People or by the defendant.iv In doing so, however, remember that, even though the defendant introduced evidence, the burden of proof remains on the People.v]

The defendant is not required to prove that he/she is not guilty.vi In fact, the defendant is not required to prove or disprove anything.vii To the contrary, the People have the burden of proving the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.viii That means, before you can find the defendant guilty of a crime, the People must prove beyond a reasonable doubt every element of the crime including that the defendant is the person who committed that crime.ix The burden of proof never shifts from the People to the defendant.x If the People fail to satisfy their burden of proof, you must find the defendant not guilty.xi If the People satisfy their burden of proof, you must find the defendant guilty. xii

What does our law mean when it requires proof of guilt "beyond a reasonable doubt"?xiii

The law uses the term, "proof beyond a reasonable doubt," to tell you how convincing the evidence of guilt must be to permit a verdict of guilty.xiv The law recognizes that, in dealing with human affairs, there are very few things in this world that we know with absolute certainty. Therefore, the law does not require the People to prove a defendant guilty beyond all possible doubt.xv On the other hand, it is not sufficient to prove that the defendant is probably guilty.xvi In a criminal case, the proof of guilt must be stronger than that.xvii It must be beyond a reasonable doubt.xviii

A reasonable doubt is an honest doubt of the defendant's guilt for which a reason exists based upon the nature and quality of the evidence.xix It is an actual doubt, not an imaginary doubt.xx It is a doubt that a reasonable person, acting in a matter of this importance, would be likely to entertain because of the evidence that was presented or because of the lack of convincing evidence.xxi

Proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt is proof that leaves you so firmly convinced xxii of the defendant's guilt that you have no reasonable doubt of the existence of any element of the crime or of the defendant's identity as the person who committed the crime.xxiii

In determining whether or not the People have proven the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, you should be guided solely by a full and fair evaluation of the evidence. After carefully evaluating the evidence, each of you must decide whether or not that evidence convinces you beyond a reasonable doubt of the defendant's guilt.

Whatever your verdict may be, it must not rest upon baseless speculations.xxiv Nor may it be influenced in any way by bias, prejudice, sympathy, or by a desire to bring an end to your deliberations or to avoid an unpleasant duty.xxv

If you are not convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty of a charged crime, you must find the defendant not guilty of that crime. If you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty of a charged crime, you must find the defendant guilty of that crime.xxvi

Answer 2

Lets be real here. There is always a hint of doubt and in court you either give them the benefit of the doubt or you accept that you doubt some part of the argument but within reason and can look at the decision on a scale. If you are closer to the 80%-90% guilty, but not 100% sure, then there is reasonable doubt and penalty should be paid.

Answer 3

it means that the proposition being presented by the government must be proven to the extent that there is no "reasonable doubt" in the mind of a reasonable person that the defendant is guilty. There can still be a doubt, but only to the extent that it would not affect a "reasonable person's" belief that the defendant is guilty. If the doubt that is raised does affect a "reasonable person's" belief that the defendant is guilty, the jury is not satisfied beyond a "reasonable doubt".

Answer 4

Just what it says. if you have any reasonable doubt, then you should state it in your decision and the guy walks. I would go with what seems more likely, as i think most jurors do. There are many instances in which obvious criminals get off cause the jury says, Well, maybe those gloves are a little tight
wtf! he ran from those cops! Why if he had nothing to hide?

Answer 5

In criminal proceedings, a standard of proof that stipulates that a charge is not proved if the court is not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the accused committed the offence charged.

Answer 6

Reasonable doubt is not 100 hundred percent sure if the defendent is guilty. Remember all defendents are innocent until proven guilty

Answer 7

a doubt u can reason with

Answer 8

just what it sounds like. Doubt. enough to male you believe, while also disbelieving. In other words it could be true. But it also could be false.

Answer 9

Reasonable doubt is 5%. (5% sure that they did not do it)

Preponderance of the Evidence is %51. (51% sure that they did it).

Answer 10

to have no reason not to think otherwise